Posted
by
Unknown Lameron Saturday July 05, 2014 @04:43PM
from the can't-make-art-so-time-to-sue dept.

Torrentfreak acquired slides from the Anti-Piracy and Content Protection Summit indicating that Rightscorp wants ISPs to disconnect repeat copyright infringers, and that 140 small ISPs are already doing so. From the article: Christopher Sabec, CEO of Rightscorp, says that they have been in talks with various Internet providers urging them to step up their game. Thus far a total of 140 ISPs are indeed following this disconnection principle. ... By introducing disconnections Rightcorp hopes to claim more settlements to increase the company’s revenue stream. They offer participating ISPs a tool to keep track of the number of warnings each customer receives, and the providers are encouraged to reconnect the subscribers if the outstanding bills have been paid. ... Cutting off repeat infringers is also in the best interests of ISPs according to Rightscorp, who note that it is a requirement for all providers if they are to maintain their DMCA safe harbor.
The presentation slides seem to indicate that Rightscorp is planning to go after the safe harbor protections that ISPs are given under the DMCA in order to force the issue.

Its pretty easy, all they gotta prove to the court is the ISP is allowing piracy to happen on their network and not taken any "reasonable" action to stop it. As for what is reasonable is the question. If court finds they haven't done enough then they can be held financially liable for what end users do. They tried it against google for videos on youtube, hence how they got backdoor access to delete shit with almost no oversight.

The problem is that the safe harbor provision doesn't require ISPs or Network providers to do anything but remove claimed infringing content per a DMCA request and replace it per a counter claim. Well, that is as long as the infringing content is a product of the third party and not the ISP's actions.

Doing that should legally be doing enough. This is a bit different than Youtube as youtube exists for the sole purpose of something similar to the copyrighted materials whereas ISPs are simply a carrier allowin

Like for example the fact that these download snoopers so far have not shown to have legal status to be enforcing anything. Like the fact that most of these "investigators" don't have anything that qualifies as legal evidence. Like the fact that they have been shown to be breaking the same laws they accuse others of breaking (you can't break the law to enforce the law). Like the fact that cutting off Internet service based on thin evidence of non-criminal wrongdoing is probably illegal.

Oh, yes, there are MANY problems with this whole scheme. And a lot of it could be solved TOMORROW by the FCC choosing to regulate ISPs as Title II Common Carriers.

Oh, yes, there are MANY problems with this whole scheme. And a lot of it could be solved TOMORROW by the FCC choosing to regulate ISPs as Title II Common Carriers.

Actually, all this is probably exactly why the FCC is choosing not to regulate ISPs as common carriers. If they do that, then the copyright holders and the government have to do the legwork of tracking down and prosecuting copyright violators. The way it's set up now, they can just threaten the ISP and make the ISP do the busywork for them.

Like for example the fact that these download snoopers so far have not shown to have legal status to be enforcing anything. Like the fact that most of these "investigators" don't have anything that qualifies as legal evidence. Like the fact that they have been shown to be breaking the same laws they accuse others of breaking (you can't break the law to enforce the law).

Rather you can only do this if you are an actual "cop". Another Issue is if these people do have the authority to represent the copyright

Even then, the actual legal exceptions for police are fewer and thinner than most people think.

A few years ago, in one state nearby, the legislature clarified that when police are off-duty (off the clock), they have to obey the same laws, and particularly the same firearms laws, as everybody else. There was a huge howl of protest from law enforcement but they failed to make any legitimate case that it was somehow dangerous or unfair.

Really what people should keep in mind here is that these "rights" groups aren't doing this to right any real social wrongs. They're doing it to make money. Plain and simple. Make money by threatening to make other suffer.

If that's not a pretty good description of extortion, I don't know what is.

Also, they seem pretty ironically named; "rightscorp" ? how about people's right to internet? to access all human knowledge (well, at least that part of all human knowledge which hasn't been locked inside the walls of academia, despite being funded by society at large) ? surely that trumps wha

they are simply targeting those who cannot afford to defend themselves, their networks, their business, or their customers; or the rights to due process for all, from the perceived threat of a legal onslaught from big media.

The most intriguing thing in this to me......is that they were able to identify 140 ISPs, presumably 130 or so of which were not owned by a regional monopoly phone company or a cable company.

One would be Nextech, owned by Rural Telephone, in northwest Kansas. I've recieved several phone calls from them, and they have shut off my internet before due to supposed infrining. Frankly I think what I do with my internet is none of their damn business. I've even got calls for running a Tor node (not exit) along with I2P. Giving ISP's common carrier status would solve the problem. Since Rural Telephone is a common carrier I wonder if it makes their subsidiary Nextech one too? No such luck I think.

The real question cleverly ignored by these rights-maximalists is"Is the ISP/provider responsible for the content posted by others."As we know, absent *ACTUAL INDUCEMENT TO INFRINGE*the answer is no. There is no secondary liability to ISPs norreponsibility as per the CDA sec 230.

Now if the ISPs *ACTUALLY INDUCE* (see Napster and possibly Mega,or so USDOJ says), then there is a POSSIBLE liability.THAT's the only thing providers need to fear, but instead they knee-jerktake down material.

Note that the DMCA notice is not "DMCA Takedown notice" but rather"Notice of ***CLAIMED INFRINGEMENT***" (emphasis mine).

A "safe harbor" doesn't mean that a LACK OF A SAFE HARBOR meansinstant guilt/civil liability. That is a fact lost on most knee-jerk ISPs.

ISPs should pull up their big-boy shorts and quit taking it in the pantsfrom every email-script that tells them to take down content because DMCA.

Emy script verifies that this is true under oath and here's my script-copiedpgp signature because dmca.

Too bad I use a VPN, so I'll continue to download everything still as I always do before I buy it. It's not exactly like you can return shitty media, don't believe me go to Walmart and try it. They'll say no then after you bitch ten or twenty minuets they'll finally offer an exchange "thank god", but when you get back there they'll only let that exchange be the same piece of shit you're trying to return. It's at that point I get arrested for going ballistic, headbutting the guy trolling me and kicking the c

It's not like Song of the South [youtube.com] is hard to find (though I supposed Disney will get around to flinging it into the nearest briar patch eventually). Why is the French animation hard to find? I mean, Netflix has nothing interesting for streaming so it's no surprise it doesn't have something so obscure.... or was that your point?

My point is that if something isn't available even on DVD decades later, it definitely won't be available on streaming. Rights come with responsibilities, and some people who otherwise obey copyright law might end up having to pirate in cases where a copyright owner violates its "copyresponsibility". If a film or TV series still lacks a home video release years after its theatrical or broadcast run, I guess some people who pirate it feel an other-than-legal justification that when a copyright owner acts lik

You cannot download unless someone else is uploading. Since uploading is copyright infringement, and thus illegal, you are party to the illegal action. Your argument is like claiming it's not illegal to buy bootleg goods.

I don't really see your point. The fact is, the person doing the downloading likely didn't have anything at all to do with the uploading. There are an uncountable number of files available for download right now, and I'm willing to bet that you didn't have anything to do with a vast majority of them. Why would that suddenly change if you decide to download some of them? It wouldn't. The only way you'd be related is if you uploaded the file yourself, or helped someone else do so.

If you limit their upload bandwidth to the point that they can't finish uploading something before the next one airs, they'll fall behind the regular cable/satellite schedule and people will stop downloading copyrighted material and subscribe to cable/satellite instead to watch their shows.

I promise to locate and submit at least one copyright-infringing work that is not yet easily available into the standard pirate channels of circulation in protest. It'll probably be something very obscure, as all the mainstream stuff is already out there. I don't know what it'll be yet.

And more tools will arise that will drive people so far underground they will never figure out who is doing what. And the more publicity they get, the more 'regular' people will learn there is free stuff out there.

I can't fathom why any ISPs in their right mind would go along with this crap.

Acting against your customer base in this way is a good way to lose customers and ruin your brand. I can only assume not all 140 ISPs have the luxury of not having to give a shit about their customers.

Most importantly taking punitive action against someone you *suspect* of breaking the law is itself illegal. By taking matters into your own hands you open yourself up to lawsuits from effected customers. SOPA/PIPA crashing and b

I used to work DMCA requests for a moderately large ISP. They are NOT disconnecting people for repeat abuse. They would never disconnect you because some 3rd party doesn't like what your using your connection for. You're a paying customer, and the rights hold is not. There is no financial incentive for them to disconnect you.

They will disconnect you if you're costing them money however. But for an ISP, that's a difficult thing to do. There are laws, and franchise agreements with the city. They're pretty much required to give you service, even if you cost them money... unless they can find an excuse to disconnect you. Like if you were a software pirate.

The moral of the story? If you live in an upscale apartment complex, where everyones got 1gig fiber connections, you're never getting disconnected. EVER. If you're 10 miles outside of town in a sparsely populated area with old decaying lines that the ISP has to constantly come out and repair, and every time you start up your torrent client the entire neighborhoods network crawls to a halt, it may be in your best interest to avoid doing things that would give your ISP and excuse to boot you.

Notice how they said a bunch of small rural ISPs were the only ones who'd started doing this. Yea, this has nothing to do with piracy and everything to do with getting rid of customers that are costing them money.

> A number of companies have taken to monitoring *ALL* BT traffic of consequence on a *GLOBAL* basis.

I call BS on that. The Pirate Bay alone has 46 million peers active. Nobody short of the NSA, and maybe not even them, can monitor that much traffic. If "of consequence" means the several thousand torrents with > 100 active peers, it would be feasible to get statistics, and maybe an IP list, but not monitor the actual traffic between users.

It's 2014 people! Instead of insisting on getting yourself caught with direct connects and 'no log' vpns (subject to demands just the same, lol, idiots) ALL you stupid torrenters should go fire up https://geti2p.net/ , configure it to donate about five times the bandwidth you use back to the network, then TORRENT THE FUCK out of all the torrents there.Totally FREE, totally DARK, no fucking PIG MAFIAA, EVER gonna swoop your ass!!!This means you don't have to HIT and RUN leech anymore like the little pussies

We appreciate your patronage over the last 15 years as we grew from a single hotspot operation to the large WISP providing 100k+ customser with the only viable connection to the outside world. You have built your businesses and personal lives on our network and we have worked hard together to fill the last mile gap that was keeping your communities in the stone age.